FAQ on Errata

Wow, even more nerfs for signature deed.

Edit: cleaned up my language a bit. Sorry, I was a bit unhappy.

And they made abundant ammo pointless. Well, one of my slingers only had one or two games left anyways, and another is already retired. But the ratfolk that I was planning to make a gulch gunner... probably going to reconsider.

Still, it speeds up how fast gunslingers kill things as they'll no longer be wasting their first round on AA.

Question.

Are the online resources kept up to date with alterations? While we tend to get the books.. more often than not we use a quick search on the paizo prd.

The archaeologist is not intended to gain additional rounds of its luck ability as it levels. It receives a number of other abilities to balance out the loss of bardic performance.

Thanks, Jason! It's been a while since I wanted that one answered.

Please do address the lack of additional rounds on Archaeologist's Luck (for the Archaeologist Bard archetype). It currently gains no extra rounds as it levels.

The archaeologist is not intended to gain additional rounds of its luck ability as it levels. It receives a number of other abilities to balance out the loss of bardic performance.

That said... I do seem to recall the writer of that archetype mentioning that he should probably have the rounds of Luck bonus increase as the Bard levels up.

Urban Barbarian got a minor nerf in that they no longer have the option of picking between a normal rage and a controlled rage, but that's pretty minor.

Considering how good that bonus is, I think it works just fine as currently written. The archetype gains a fair number of other bonuses to compensate.

are PDFs automatically updated?

Yes. If you purchased this PDF, the updated version is available on your My Downloads page. If you have opted in to receive updates about your Digital Assets, you should have also received an email about this.

I have to say I love the changes to Master of Many Styles. It removes the two level dip for Pummeling Charge and makes it actually worthwhile to play on it's own with the attack boost per active style. It's still a good dip, but it's not overwhelming like it was before.

What about another printing of the Advanced Players Guide. I know you cannot discuss next printings but I would like to point out that it's been nearly 5 years since it's seen an update.

This. Just sayin'. Or an errata to Ultimate Equipment, which still has the old, original printings of basically every single piece of equipment and is horribly out of date.

Considering how good that bonus is, I think it works just fine as currently written. The archetype gains a fair number of other bonuses to compensate.

Do note that as written, you can extend the number of Archie's Luck you have through FCBs that increase Bardic Performance rounds, Extra Bardic Performance, Lingering Performance, and so on.

I have to say I love the changes to Master of Many Styles. It removes the two level dip for Pummeling Charge and makes it actually worthwhile to play on it's own with the attack boost per active style. It's still a good dip, but it's not overwhelming like it was before.

Same. I do wish it comes with UnMonk adaptation notes though!!!

Sooo....

Sap Adapt only counts number of D6 sneaks instead of twice the number. Does Sap Master count the extra Non Lethal dice as a part of that?

(3d6 normal, Non - Lethal is 6D6 with correct weapon, getting +6 with Sap Adapt)

Started looking at the errata and then just stopped. There's so much that isn't "errata" but updates and rebalancing to the rules.
While I understand the need to keep things in line for the sake of balance, making my physical book useless at the table (because any given page or feature could have been errated and requires double checking) is a problematic way to do so.

The urge to continually "fix" the game and revise the books didn't do 4th Edition D&D any favours and I don't like it now. Accommodating the revisions causes more disruption to my game than many of the mechanics that were changed.

Sooo....

Sap Adapt only counts number of D6 sneaks instead of twice the number. Does Sap Master count the extra Non Lethal dice as a part of that?

(3d6 normal, Non - Lethal is 6D6 with correct weapon, getting +6 with Sap Adapt)

According to James Jacobs, yes. You do add the sap master dice.

I've grown to fear errata, but this one for the most part I approve of. There were some odd things in here (RIP Gunslinger 6+), but overall good changes. I'm slowly feeling my faith being restored.

I'll actually review the errata tomorrow but right now I am feeling... annoyed we'll say that it's another book I shouldn't bother checking anymore. Why do I keep doing this to myself? I should just stop buying physical copies of pathfinder all together and go with PDFs.

I don't understand these gunslinger above 6th level comments. What am I missing?

I don't understand these gunslinger above 6th level comments. What am I missing?

Many player seem to feel that the class doesn't offer anything worth spending the levels on past six now. Apparently further changes to signature deed and reload speeds cause this trend of comment.

Started looking at the errata and then just stopped. There's so much that isn't "errata" but updates and rebalancing to the rules.

While I understand the need to keep things in line for the sake of balance, making my physical book useless at the table (because any given page or feature could have been errated and requires double checking) is a problematic way to do so.

The urge to continually "fix" the game and revise the books didn't do 4th Edition D&D any favours and I don't like it now. Accommodating the revisions causes more disruption to my game than many of the mechanics that were changed.

To be fair, mentioning 4th Edition is the tabletop gaming equivalent of Godwin's law.

... blink... master of many styles needed a buff? Did i miss something?

To be fair, mentioning 4th Edition is the tabletop gaming equivalent of Godwin's law.

Yeah, I weighed the pros and cons of if I should risk invoking it...

... blink... master of many styles needed a buff? Did i miss something?

You actually need to pick multiple styles and can't use the early bonus feats for later "style" feats. I believe only the first feat of the chain is flagged as a Style feat.

Considering how good that bonus is, I think it works just fine as currently written. The archetype gains a fair number of other bonuses to compensate.

This. I play an archaeologist in one campaign, and it's a wicked powerful ability as is. I've found that taking Lingering Performance gave me enough rounds to get through all but the most grueling adventuring days.

Considering how good that bonus is, I think it works just fine as currently written. The archetype gains a fair number of other bonuses to compensate.

It could get fewer roudns than a normal bard (1 per level, instead of 2). But it scaling with level would be nice and balanced. While the archetype does gain a fair number of other bonuses, he also loses quite a few awesome bard abilities.

So, how soon before we should expect the pregens to get updated. We use a lot of the Ultimate Combat ones in our PFS games for players who aren't high enough. Should we be adjusting them ourselves, or just leave them as they are? The only problem I see with leaving them as-is would be the players who have to change their level 7 gunslingers.

Started looking at the errata and then just stopped. There's so much that isn't "errata" but updates and rebalancing to the rules.

While I understand the need to keep things in line for the sake of balance, making my physical book useless at the table (because any given page or feature could have been errated and requires double checking) is a problematic way to do so.

The urge to continually "fix" the game and revise the books didn't do 4th Edition D&D any favours and I don't like it now. Accommodating the revisions causes more disruption to my game than many of the mechanics that were changed.

Let's see:

Plan A: We ignore the problems, refuse to answer questions that people keep asking, and force people in PFS to deal with balance issues. A lot of the audience is unhappy, but hey, you're happy.

Plan B: We fix the problems and you are forced to incorporate them into your home game. A lot of the audience is pleased, but you aren't.

Plan C: We fix the problems, and so long as you're not playing in Pathfinder Society, you ignore all of these changes. (Or just the ones you want to ignore, if that makes you happier.) Yet everybody who values them can have them, so everybody's happy!

We have decided not to go with Plan A. *I* certainly think Plan C is the best, but it turns out that if you really want to pick Plan B, I can't stop you.

I used to view errata as a message clearing up a misinterpretation of a rule/adjudicating how a rule should function or fixing something that was broken and did not function as written. Errata has become more like patch notes for video games. I think that's why I tend to ignore them or just mine them for the real errata.

Vic, from a different view point I agree that C is the winning option for how to handle things. The issue is that the updates aren't just hitting PFS, they're going to the source material instead of a PFS reference document. Some of my players will buy the PDF or a more recent physical copy than the source I have on my shelf. That causes conflict at tables outside of PFS, where it really shouldn't. PFS is it's own strange beast with it's own esoteric rules and adjustments and that is perfectly fine, when it flows out and begins to twist the rest of the game it becomes a problem.

I used to view errata as a message clearing up a misinterpretation of a rule/adjudicating how a rule should function or fixing something that was broken and did not function as written. Errata has become more like patch notes for video games. I think that's why I tend to ignore them or just mine them for the real errata.

Errata is actually used for misprints. FAQs are clearing up rulings.

For an evolving game like Pathfinder, there had to be a term for balance changes.

Lovely, I've now had to change my home game character due to errata more than I've gotten to play him (for the better this time). Neato. Are there any protected classes I can grab that won't be changed any time soon?

I have to say that that the alteration to the Abundant Ammunition spell is a welcome one as that stops players from using it and weapon blanches to get more than their ten shots. A very good change!

I always viewed it as compensation for the ridiculous per-shot cost the gunslinger has until he can afford this (you know, when everyone else has been running around with 'eternal' ammo bows anyways for better DPR), especially advanced or modern firearms, which cost as much as magic weapons before you even enchant them. *EVENTUALLY* when you finally have infinite ammunition, yours gets to be adamantine bullets. Because the other guy no longer NEEDS adamantine, because he could afford a +5 weapon and you can't.

Although the wording on the "alchemical" part significantly worries me in regards to people (I can think of several better adjectives to use on them but let's say 'people' for now) arguing that the powder or metal cartridges are alchemical parts of the ammunition and that therefore screw-you-gunslinger.

Seriously though. It's a gunslinger. They needed no bloody nerfing.

Still no definition of what "mounted combat feats" are for Sohei Monks. Mounted Skirmisher possibly being a level 1 feat is still my top clarification wish.

CalebTGordan wrote:

I don't understand these gunslinger above 6th level comments. What am I missing?

Many player seem to feel that the class doesn't offer anything worth spending the levels on past six now. Apparently further changes to signature deed and reload speeds cause this trend of comment.

TBH the Gunslinger class didn't really have much of anything going for it after 5th anyway. Lack of misfire on some archetypes and Signature Deed shenanigans were really the only things even vaguely worth taking levels in it for after you got that sweet, sweet Dex to damage. Gunslinger is pretty much just a Fighter whose weapon explodes occasionally.

Okay.

I'm gonna put my hand up and ask why Urban Barbarians lost the option to make a normal rage if they wanted.

They already lost Medium Armor Proficiency, and traded out Fast Movement for something arguably less useful. Having the option to still make a full-ham rage was great, and definitely didn't make them more powerful.

It was an option, not an imbalance.

There is a serious problem with the Skald that is hopefully just terrible wording (ACG not UC). As written, raging song is pretty much worthless for defensive abilities, no escape, and attacks of opportunity.

If accepted, the raging song's effects last for that ally's turn or until the song ends, whichever comes first.

Shouldn't it last until the beginning of the ally's next turn where they need to make the choice again? Even then, it shouldn't end if the ally accepts it. Temporary loss of con could lead to death. Temporary hp from Energy Absorption is also lost.

This is also a problem if people decide to change the con bonus to temp hp like the unchained barbarian, it would mean losing those temp hp and never getting any back for that fight.

This has been asked on the forums multiple times, but a developer has never answered.

Torbyne wrote:

CalebTGordan wrote:

I don't understand these gunslinger above 6th level comments. What am I missing?

Many player seem to feel that the class doesn't offer anything worth spending the levels on past six now. Apparently further changes to signature deed and reload speeds cause this trend of comment.

TBH the Gunslinger class didn't really have much of anything going for it after 5th anyway. Lack of misfire on some archetypes and Signature Deed shenanigans were really the only things even vaguely worth taking levels in it for after you got that sweet, sweet Dex to damage. Gunslinger is pretty much just a Fighter whose weapon explodes occasionally.

Well, you notably get:

1. Lightning Reload at 11th (sort of mandatory to full-attack, cheapens shot cost too).

2. Nimble scaling.

3. Evasive at 15th (beats putting 8 levels into Rogue and lose a ton of BAB).

4. Slinger's Luck at 15th (unlimited saving throw rerolls that refill as you fight is pretty neat.)

5. More FCBs.

6. Oh, Bleeding Wound is sweet to f#+& up casters.

7. Some bonus feats.

8. True Grit at the end of the line...

It's not a ton of things, but it's appealing enough.

I do agree in that the class needs more scaling features.

Okay.

I'm gonna put my hand up and ask why Urban Barbarians lost the option to make a normal rage if they wanted.

They already lost Medium Armor Proficiency, and traded out Fast Movement for something arguably less useful. Having the option to still make a full-ham rage was great, and definitely didn't make them more powerful.

It was an option, not an imbalance.

Urban Barbarians did not have the ability to use both types of rage in any of the three printings, but the wording was misleading in that regard, leading to an ambiguity that made it seem like maybe they did. Incidentally, this is one of the reasons that we have been more recently trying to avoid the use of the word "may" in rules text if at all possible.

DeltaPangaea wrote:

Okay.

I'm gonna put my hand up and ask why Urban Barbarians lost the option to make a normal rage if they wanted.

They already lost Medium Armor Proficiency, and traded out Fast Movement for something arguably less useful. Having the option to still make a full-ham rage was great, and definitely didn't make them more powerful.

It was an option, not an imbalance.

Urban Barbarians did not have the ability to use both types of rage in any of the three printings, but the wording was misleading in that regard, leading to an ambiguity that made it seem like maybe they did. Incidentally, this is one of the reasons that we have been more recently trying to avoid the use of the word "may" in rules text if at all possible.

Regardless of intent, I fail to see what was so gamebreaking about being able to use either rage that necessitated an errata. It's not like you could use both at once, so I don't see what the issue with letting them use either actually was, especially considering the other things they give up.

Let's see:

Plan A: We ignore the problems, refuse to answer questions that people keep asking, and force people in PFS to deal with balance issues. A lot of the audience is unhappy, but hey, you're happy.

Plan B: We fix the problems and you are forced to incorporate them into your home game. A lot of the audience is pleased, but you aren't.

Plan C: We fix the problems, and so long as you're not playing in Pathfinder Society, you ignore all of these changes. (Or just the ones you want to ignore, if that makes you happier.) Yet everybody who values them can have them, so everybody's happy!

We have decided not to go with Plan A. *I* certainly think Plan C is the best, but it turns out that if you really want to pick Plan B, I can't stop you.

It all sounds very reasonable when you say it like that, but as a retailer I can tell you that 4th edition books really did go from "selling really well" to "literally impossible to sell" once Wizards crossed the power-level-errata threshold Paizo's now teetering on the edge of. 4th had the character builder software you could subscribe to, and players nearly universally used that instead of books because they knew they couldn't trust their books to be right. Paizo has PDFs and the PRD to fill much the same role. This update just pushed me over the edge of beginning to feel like I can't trust my books, and it's making my stomach sink. If people stop trusting their books, they'll stop buying them, which will cause retailers to stop supporting the game, which will dry up demand for the game very quickly. I don't mean to get all doom-and-gloom on you, but the last few updates are perched at the top of a very slippery slope.

Question.

Are the online resources kept up to date with alterations? While we tend to get the books.. more often than not we use a quick search on the paizo prd.

It appears that the PRD has been updated (from the couple items I have looked up).

DeltaPangaea: An additional reason for clarifying the Urban barbarian is because without the "modifies rage" text, technically the ability didn't count as the Rage ability at all (for purposes of other things, like Rage powers).

Bravo btw, oh mighty PDT.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

... blink... master of many styles needed a buff? Did i miss something?

You actually need to pick multiple styles and can't use the early bonus feats for later "style" feats. I believe only the first feat of the chain is flagged as a Style feat.

AHHH! Got it thank you. That should stop EVERY character from dipping that like biscotti.

Zwordsman wrote:

Question.

Are the online resources kept up to date with alterations? While we tend to get the books.. more often than not we use a quick search on the paizo prd.

It appears that the PRD has been updated (from the couple items I have looked up).

DeltaPangaea: An additional reason for clarifying the Urban barbarian is because without the "modifies rage" text, technically the ability didn't count as the Rage ability at all (for purposes of other things, like Rage powers).

Bravo btw, oh mighty PDT.

See now, I can understand that. That's sort of what Errata should be. But they should have looked at how the ability was potentially being used based on its wording and decided on whether that was actually valid or not rather than just stomping on it and going 'NO. NO FUN PERMITTED.'

I've got a character right now who's an Urban Barbarian, and I was really excited for the point when she'd be pushed enough emotionally to go into a full berserk rage as opposed to just using her anger to boost her ability. Which I could do by the rules.

I'm just confused as to why Feral Combat Training was taken out back and shot like Old Yeller with a Tommy-Gun.

Prior to this, a Monk could up the damage of 1 Natural Attack to the same as their Unarmed damage, but they were limited to a fixed number of Attacks each round when using Flurry (meaning Feral Combat Training wasn't extremely useful for Natural Attacks for the Monk).

A Brawler was in the same ballpark as the Monk, as was the Sacred Fist.

On the other hand, a Fighter could make use of Feral Combat Training by mixing it with Martial Versatiltiy to add on lots of Natural Weapon attacks to its Full Attack Action and give all of them some much-needed bonuses to hit, but then it didn't have Scaling damage, so all the attacks were generally left weaker than Manufactured Weapons.

Realistically, the Warpriest was the only class that really had a field day with Feral Combat Training because it could mix scaling damage with Martial Versatility and attacking with lots and lots of pumped-up attacks; even then, this wasn't horrendously overpowered, considering the amount of effort, items, and feats needed to make this a viable build.

Now, however, that whole idea is just dead and gone, and a river's been diverted over the grave.

At level 11 when you have like 90k gold or something??
By that point you can spend 600 g to craft 100 bullets, not a big deal. Totally useless lol.